When the global financial system collapsed there was no shortage of unsolicited advice. For example, there were talks about the beginning of the end of capitalism, or that greed never pays, or risk management can never be taken for granted. The unfortunate end of the hostage-taking crisis in Manila likewise generated tons of condemnation and unsolicited advice.
Every undertaking has a beginning and will have an ending. And linear thinking would typically proceed from the starting point. Yet breakthrough ideas come from a reverse-thought process – i.e., starting with the end in view. (It is counterintuitive and why recommendations from analysts could be rejected by bosses who are bottom line-oriented. More about being inclusive in future blogs.) And if we are to raise the performance bar and create a culture of excellence in order to become competitive, we must not take failure as an option – i.e., risk management is an imperative? In short, asking the question, ‘what is the worst-case scenario that will fail us’ is mandatory?
Simply put: (a) starting with the end in view and (b) crystallizing the worst-case scenario would lend itself to preempting failure – i.e., do lateral thinking and avoid being blindsided?
The writer remembers the first time he was shown around the factory of his Eastern European friends; and they were surprised that he did it rather rapidly – they were expecting him to linger and really take in the totality of the factory environment. And so the writer, because efficiency is the true measure – the end point – of a factory, said: ‘When a visitor walks into an efficient facility, there is no mistaking that it is an efficient facility’. And the swift response: ‘Yes, we have an inefficient factory! Will you help us make it more efficient? We have a cost issue; in fact we could not afford some of the quality requisites of ISO 9000, like water-treating, for example.’
What is their worst-case scenario? Quality issues could adversely affect product competiveness and thus depress sales and eventually profitability. And in that scenario, especially given their limited resources, the business could fold up. And so the writer suggested: ‘Try margins’ – start with the end in view and do lateral thinking. And their ‘aha moment’ came: ‘We have a margin issue, not a cost issue! (And the mindset guided the pursuit of new businesses, specifically, tapping state-of-the-art manufacturing technologies from the West; and thus the rapid profitable growth of the company.) And it started the efforts to define the businesses they should be in as well as the segments to target and compete; and by extension, the imperative of crafting a product development initiative.
The Aquino Administration is currently crafting its infrastructure development initiative – to establish the foundation for our strategic, competitive industries – and it will require a ton of money and thus the need for private participation. What is their worst-case scenario – that they will not generate the requisite level of funding to complete an ambitious program, for example? How must they prioritize the projects? Which ones will deliver the biggest bang for the buck – the 80-20 rule, e.g., power should be top of the list and pursued with utmost urgency? How will they proactively solicit private participation? How can they motivate the private sector to step up to the plate? What about foreign participation? In short, how do we solve a problem before it happens – before it becomes a disaster?
Of course, no one likes to be at the receiving end of unsolicited advice – but when beyond massive poverty we are the laughingstock of the region in many respects, we want to take stock and take it seriously?
No comments:
Post a Comment